1. With wisdom both ancient and new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are called to show on the present challenges and opportunities positioned by clinical and technological developments, particularly by the recent advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition concerns the gift of intelligence as a necessary aspect of how people are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an essential vision of the human person and the biblical contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this gift of intelligence need to be expressed through the accountable usage of factor and technical abilities in the stewardship of the produced world.

2. The Church encourages the advancement of science, innovation, the arts, and other types of human endeavor, viewing them as part of the "cooperation of males and female with God in refining the noticeable creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "provided skill to human beings, that he might be glorified in his marvelous works" (Sir. 38:6). Human abilities and imagination originate from God and, when used appropriately, glorify God by reflecting his knowledge and goodness. Due to this, when we ask ourselves what it suggests to "be human," we can not exclude a factor to consider of our scientific and technological abilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that today Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are especially considerable, as one of the objectives of this technology is to mimic the human intelligence that developed it. For example, unlike many other human productions, AI can be trained on the results of human creativity and after that generate brand-new "artifacts" with a level of speed and ability that typically equals or exceeds what humans can do, such as producing text or images equivalent from human structures. This raises vital issues about AI's prospective function in the growing crisis of fact in the general public online forum. Moreover, this innovation is developed to find out and make certain choices autonomously, adapting to brand-new circumstances and supplying services not visualized by its programmers, and thus, it raises basic questions about ethical obligation and human security, with broader ramifications for society as a whole. This new situation has actually prompted lots of people to review what it means to be human and the function of humanity in the world.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a new and substantial phase in humankind's engagement with technology, placing it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its impact is felt worldwide and in a large range of areas, including interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and international relations. As AI advances rapidly toward even greater achievements, it is critically important to consider its anthropological and ethical ramifications. This includes not only mitigating risks and preventing harm however likewise ensuring that its applications are used to promote human development and the typical good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment regarding AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' require a restored "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church offers its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the global dialogue on these concerns, the Church welcomes those delegated with sending the faith-including moms and dads, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to dedicate themselves to this vital subject with care and attention. While this file is intended specifically for them, it is likewise implied to be available to a more comprehensive audience, particularly those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances need to be directed toward serving the human person and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the file starts by comparing principles of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, offering a framework rooted in the Church's philosophical and theological custom. Finally, the file uses guidelines to guarantee that the development and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the integral development of the human person and society.

7. The concept of "intelligence" in AI has actually progressed gradually, drawing on a variety of ideas from various disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a substantial milestone happened in 1956 when the American computer scientist John McCarthy organized a summertime workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he defined as "that of making a maker behave in manner ins which would be called intelligent if a human were so acting." [5] This workshop released a research study program focused on developing machines efficient in carrying out jobs typically related to the human intellect and smart behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research has actually advanced quickly, causing the advancement of complex systems efficient in carrying out highly advanced jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are generally designed to manage specific and restricted functions, such as translating languages, anticipating the trajectory of a storm, categorizing images, addressing concerns, or creating visual material at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, the majority of modern AI systems-particularly those using machine learning-rely on analytical reasoning rather than rational reduction. By examining big datasets to recognize patterns, AI can "predict" [7] outcomes and propose brand-new methods, simulating some cognitive procedures normal of human problem-solving. Such accomplishments have been enabled through advances in computing technology (consisting of neural networks, without supervision artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) in addition to hardware developments (such as specialized processors). Together, these innovations enable AI systems to react to numerous types of human input, adjust to new situations, and even recommend novel services not prepared for by their initial programmers. [8]
9. Due to these rapid advancements, many tasks when managed specifically by people are now turned over to AI. These systems can augment and even supersede what humans have the ability to perform in many fields, particularly in specialized areas such as data analysis, image recognition, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a particular job, numerous scientists aim to establish what is referred to as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system capable of running across all cognitive domains and performing any job within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," exceeding human intellectual capabilities, or contribute to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if theoretical, might one day eclipse the human individual, while still others welcome this prospective transformation. [9]
10. Underlying this and numerous other point of views on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the very same way to describe both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not catch the full scope of the concept. In the case of human beings, intelligence is a professors that pertains to the individual in his or her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, frequently with the anticipation that the activities characteristic of the human mind can be broken down into digitized actions that makers can reproduce. [10]
11. This functional point of view is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "intelligent" if a person can not identify its habits from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "habits" refers just to the performance of particular intellectual jobs; it does not account for the complete breadth of human experience, that includes abstraction, feelings, creativity, and the visual, ethical, and religious sensibilities. Nor does it incorporate the full variety of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, when it comes to AI, the "intelligence" of a system is assessed methodologically, however also reductively, based on its ability to produce proper responses-in this case, those related to the human intellect-regardless of how those responses are created.

12. AI's advanced functions give it advanced abilities to carry out jobs, however not the capability to think. [12] This difference is most importantly crucial, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly shapes how we comprehend the relationship between human thought and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one should recall the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which provide a deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human individual. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has played a main role in comprehending what it means to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to understand." [15] This understanding, with its capacity for abstraction that understands the nature and significance of things, sets human beings apart from the animal world. [16] As theorists, theologians, and psychologists have analyzed the specific nature of this intellectual faculty, they have also checked out how humans comprehend the world and their special location within it. Through this expedition, the Christian tradition has pertained to comprehend the human individual as a being including both body and soul-deeply linked to this world and yet transcending it. [17]
14. In the classical custom, the principle of intelligence is frequently understood through the complementary ideas of "reason" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not separate faculties but, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are two modes in which the same intelligence operates: "The term intellect is presumed from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is taken from the analytical and discursive process." [18] This concise description highlights the two basic and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the instinctive grasp of the truth-that is, nabbing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to reasoning appropriate: the discursive, analytical procedure that leads to judgment. Together, intellect and reason form the 2 aspects of the act of intelligere, "the appropriate operation of the human being as such." [19]
15. Explaining the human person as a "logical" being does not minimize the person to a particular mode of thought; rather, it recognizes that the capability for intellectual understanding shapes and penetrates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether worked out well or badly, this capability is an intrinsic aspect of humanity. In this sense, the "term 'reasonable' incorporates all the capabilities of the human person," consisting of those related to "knowing and understanding, in addition to those of willing, caring, picking, and wanting; it also includes all corporeal functions carefully associated to these abilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human individual, developed in the "image of God," reason is incorporated in a manner that raises, shapes, and changes both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought thinks about the intellectual professors of the human person within the framework of an essential anthropology that views the human being as essentially embodied. In the human individual, spirit and matter "are not two natures united, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not simply the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an external shell housing an intangible "core." Rather, the entire human person is at the same time both material and spiritual. This understanding shows the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human individual as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and hence, an authentically spiritual measurement) within and through this embodied presence. [24] The extensive significance of this condition is further illuminated by the secret of the Incarnation, through which God himself took on our flesh and "raised it approximately a sublime dignity." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in physical existence, the human individual transcends the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intellect's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed flexibility of the will come from the soul, by which the human individual "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its regular mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual professors of the human individual are an essential part of an anthropology that acknowledges that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further aspects of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. Human beings are "bought by their very nature to interpersonal communion," [30] having the capability to understand one another, to provide themselves in love, and to enter into communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not an isolated faculty however is worked out in relationships, finding its max expression in discussion, cooperation, and solidarity. We discover with others, and we learn through others.

19. The relational orientation of the human person is in the everlasting self-giving of the Triune God, whose love is exposed in development and redemption. [31] The human person is "called to share, by knowledge and love, in God's own life." [32]
20. This vocation to communion with God is always connected to the call to communion with others. Love of God can not be separated from love for one's neighbor (cf. 1 Jn. 4:20; Mt. 22:37 -39). By the grace of sharing God's life, Christians are likewise called to mimic Christ's outpouring gift (cf. 2 Cor. 9:8 -11; Eph. 5:1 -2) by following his command to "love one another, as I have loved you" (Jn. 13:34). [33] Love and service, echoing the divine life of self-giving, transcend self-interest to react more completely to the human occupation (cf. 1 Jn. 2:9). Even more sublime than understanding numerous things is the commitment to look after one another, for if "I understand all mysteries and all knowledge [...] but do not have love, I am absolutely nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2).

21. Human intelligence is ultimately "God's gift fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it enables the person to check out truths that surpass mere sensory experience or energy, since "the desire for truth belongs to human nature itself. It is an innate property of human reason to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical data, human intelligence can "with real certitude attain to truth itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains just partly known, the desire for reality "spurs factor constantly to go further; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always go beyond what it has actually currently attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the boundaries of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this attraction, the human individual is resulted in look for "realities of a greater order." [39]
22. This innate drive towards the pursuit of reality is especially evident in the distinctly human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is suitable to the social nature and dignity of the human person." [41] Likewise, a steadfast orientation to the truth is necessary for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The search for reality discovers its highest expression in openness to truths that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all facts attain their supreme and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential decision that engages the entire person." [44] In this way, the human person ends up being totally what she or he is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will display their spiritual nature," making it possible for the person "to act in a manner that realizes individual freedom to the full." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the totally free act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, creates "not to increase his magnificence, but to show it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God produces according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called human beings to presume an unique function: to cultivate and care for the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, humans live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to take care of and develop production in accord with God's strategy. [49] In this, human intelligence reflects the Divine Intelligence that created all things (cf. Gen. 1-2; Jn. 1), [50] continuously sustains them, and guides them to their ultimate function in him. [51] Moreover, people are called to establish their abilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with production, people, on the one hand, use their intelligence and ability to work together with God in directing production toward the purpose to which he has called it. [52] On the other hand, development itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, helps the human mind to "rise slowly to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence becomes more plainly understood as a faculty that forms an important part of how the whole individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement needs embracing the complete scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with truth unfolds in numerous ways, as everyone, in his or her multifaceted individuality [54], looks for to understand the world, connect to others, resolve problems, reveal creativity, and pursue essential well-being through the unified interaction of the different measurements of the person's intelligence. [55] This includes sensible and linguistic capabilities however can also encompass other modes of connecting with truth. Consider the work of a craftsmen, who "need to understand how to discern, in inert matter, a specific kind that others can not acknowledge" [56] and bring it forth through insight and useful skill. Indigenous individuals who live near to the earth often have a profound sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a buddy who understands the best word to say or an individual adept at managing human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter in between individuals." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of artificial intelligence, we can not forget that poetry and love are necessary to save our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of truth into the ethical and spiritual life of the individual, assisting his/her actions because of God's goodness and truth. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its max sense, also consists of the capability to savor what holds true, great, and lovely. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel expressed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without delight." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual delight is found in the "light intellectual loaded with love, love of real good filled with happiness, delight which goes beyond every sweetness." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, for that reason, can not be reduced to the mere acquisition of truths or the capability to carry out particular jobs. Instead, it includes the individual's openness to the supreme questions of life and reflects an orientation toward the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the individual, human intelligence has the ability to access the totality of being, contemplating presence in its fullness, which surpasses what is quantifiable, and grasping the significance of what has actually been comprehended. For believers, this capability includes, in a particular method, the capability to grow in the knowledge of the secrets of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with exposed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is formed by divine love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence has an important contemplative measurement, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any utilitarian purpose.

30. Due to the foregoing conversation, the distinctions between human intelligence and current AI systems become apparent. While AI is an amazing technological achievement efficient in mimicing certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining objectives, or making choices based on quantitative data and computational logic. For example, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and cultivating interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can help experts collaborate in fixing complicated problems that "can not be handled from a single viewpoint or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI processes and mimics certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally confined to a logical-mathematical structure, which enforces fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, establishes naturally throughout the person's physical and psychological growth, formed by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although sophisticated AI systems can "find out" through processes such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is essentially various from the developmental development of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional reactions, social interactions, and the unique context of each minute. These aspects shape and type people within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physical body, counts on computational thinking and learning based upon huge datasets that include taped human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can mimic elements of human thinking and carry out particular tasks with extraordinary speed and performance, its computational capabilities represent just a fraction of the more comprehensive capabilities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not presently duplicate moral discernment or the ability to establish genuine relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is located within a personally lived history of intellectual and moral development that basically forms the individual's perspective, encompassing the physical, psychological, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not provide this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this technology or treat it as the main ways of translating the world can lead to "a loss of gratitude for the entire, for the relationships in between things, and for the wider horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks however about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its dimensions; it is also efficient in surprising insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though seemingly limitless-are matchless with the human capability to grasp reality. So much can be gained from an illness, an embrace of reconciliation, and even an easy sundown; certainly, numerous experiences we have as humans open new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining new knowledge. No device, working entirely with data, can determine up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI risks giving in to a functionalist viewpoint, where individuals are valued based upon the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend upon possessing particular abilities, cognitive and technological achievements, or specific success, however on the person's intrinsic dignity, grounded in being developed in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains intact in all circumstances, consisting of for those unable to exercise their abilities, whether it be a coming kid, an unconscious individual, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It also underpins the tradition of human rights (and, in specific, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "an essential point of merging in the look for common ground" [68] and can, thus, work as an essential ethical guide in conversations on the responsible advancement and use of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the very usage of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can show deceptive" [69] and risks overlooking what is most valuable in the human individual. In light of this, AI needs to not be viewed as a synthetic type of human intelligence however as an item of it. [70]
36. Given these considerations, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To answer this, it is essential to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human undertaking that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human creativity. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the possible engraved within human intelligence, [72] clinical query and the advancement of technical abilities are part of the "collaboration of males and female with God in improving the noticeable production." [73] At the very same time, all clinical and technological achievements are, ultimately, presents from God. [74] Therefore, people should always use their abilities in view of the higher function for which God has actually approved them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how technology has actually "treated many evils which utilized to damage and restrict human beings," [76] a fact for which we need to rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological improvements in themselves represent real human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the dignity of the human individual. [78] Like any human venture, technological advancement needs to be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "greater justice, more comprehensive fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "better than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological advancement are shared not just within the Church but likewise among many scientists, technologists, and expert associations, who significantly call for ethical reflection to direct this advancement in an accountable way.

39. To attend to these obstacles, it is necessary to highlight the value of moral obligation grounded in the dignity and vocation of the human individual. This assisting principle also uses to concerns worrying AI. In this context, the ethical measurement handles main significance because it is individuals who create systems and identify the purposes for which they are utilized. [80] Between a device and a person, only the latter is really an ethical agent-a subject of moral obligation who exercises freedom in his/her choices and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, guided by a moral conscience that calls the individual "to enjoy and to do what is excellent and to prevent wicked," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of reality in recommendation to the supreme Good to which the human individual is drawn." [83] Likewise, between a machine and a human, just the human can be sufficiently self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with prudence, and looking for the good that is possible in every scenario. [84] In reality, all of this likewise belongs to the person's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any item of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or unfavorable ends. [85] When used in ways that respect human dignity and promote the well-being of individuals and communities, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all locations where human beings are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility permits the possibility of picking what is incorrect, the moral evaluation of this technology will require to take into account how it is directed and utilized.

41. At the same time, it is not only completions that are fairly considerable however also the means employed to attain them. Additionally, the general vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are essential to consider as well. Technological products show the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "form the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements could likewise strengthen relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with a correct understanding of the human person and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the means utilized in a given application of AI, in addition to the total vision it includes, should all be assessed to ensure they appreciate human dignity and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has actually stated, "the intrinsic dignity of every male and every woman" need to be "the key criterion in examining emerging technologies; these will prove fairly sound to the extent that they help respect that dignity and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] including in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a crucial role not only in developing and producing innovation however also in directing its usage in line with the authentic good of the human individual. [90] The obligation for managing this sensibly pertains to every level of society, assisted by the principle of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to guaranteeing that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme worth of the dignity of every person and the fullness of the human occupation serves as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, in addition to to its users. It remains valid for every application of the innovation at every level of its use.

44. An assessment of the ramifications of this guiding concept could begin by considering the value of moral obligation. Since complete ethical causality belongs just to personal agents, not artificial ones, it is vital to be able to recognize and specify who bears obligation for the procedures associated with AI, particularly those efficient in finding out, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and extremely deep neural networks allow AI to solve intricate problems, they make it hard to understand the procedures that lead to the solutions they adopted. This complicates accountability given that if an AI application produces undesirable results, determining who is responsible ends up being hard. To address this problem, attention requires to be offered to the nature of accountability processes in complex, highly automated settings, where results might just end up being obvious in the medium to long term. For this, it is necessary that ultimate responsibility for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for the use of AI at each phase of the decision-making procedure. [91]
45. In addition to identifying who is accountable, it is important to determine the goals offered to AI systems. Although these systems might use without supervision autonomous knowing mechanisms and sometimes follow paths that human beings can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue goals that humans have appointed to them and are governed by procedures established by their designers and developers. Yet, this provides a difficulty since, as AI models end up being significantly efficient in independent knowing, the ability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human functions may effectively diminish. This raises the critical question of how to ensure that AI systems are purchased for the good of people and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical use of AI systems starts with those who establish, produce, handle, and oversee such systems, it is also shared by those who utilize them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the machine "makes a technical option amongst several possibilities based either on well-defined requirements or on statistical reasonings. Humans, however, not only choose, however in their hearts can deciding." [92] Those who use AI to achieve a job and follow its outcomes develop a context in which they are ultimately responsible for the power they have handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can assist human beings in making choices, the algorithms that govern it should be reliable, secure, robust enough to manage inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to mitigate predispositions and unintentional adverse effects. [93] Regulatory structures should guarantee that all legal entities remain accountable for the usage of AI and all its effects, with appropriate safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those using AI should be mindful not to become extremely depending on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases modern society's already high dependence on technology.

47. The Church's ethical and social teaching offers resources to assist guarantee that AI is used in a way that maintains human firm. Considerations about justice, for instance, need to also deal with problems such as fostering just social dynamics, maintaining worldwide security, and promoting peace. By working out vigilance, individuals and neighborhoods can discern ways to use AI to benefit mankind while avoiding applications that might degrade human dignity or damage the environment. In this context, the principle of responsibility must be understood not just in its most limited sense but as a "duty for the look after others, which is more than merely representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any technology, can be part of a conscious and responsible response to humanity's occupation to the great. However, as previously talked about, AI should be directed by human intelligence to align with this vocation, guaranteeing it respects the dignity of the human person. Recognizing this "exalted self-respect," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its advancement need to invariably work to the advantage of the human person." [96] In light of this, using AI, as Pope Francis said, must be "accompanied by an ethic motivated by a vision of the typical good, an ethic of liberty, responsibility, and fraternity, capable of fostering the full development of people in relation to others and to the entire of production." [97]
49. Within this general perspective, some observations follow below to highlight how the preceding arguments can help offer an ethical orientation in practical situations, in line with the "knowledge of heart" that Pope Francis has actually proposed. [98] While not extensive, this discussion is provided in service of the discussion that considers how AI can be used to maintain the dignity of the human individual and promote the typical good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the intrinsic self-respect of each human and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family need to support the development of brand-new innovations and serve as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are used." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce essential innovations in farming, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire countries and individuals, and the growth of human fraternity and social relationship," and therefore be "utilized to promote important human advancement." [101] AI might also assist companies identify those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this technology could contribute to human advancement and the common good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds lots of possibilities for promoting the great, it can likewise prevent or perhaps counter human development and the common good. Pope Francis has kept in mind that "evidence to date recommends that digital technologies have increased inequality in our world. Not just distinctions in material wealth, which are also substantial, however likewise differences in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be utilized to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create new forms of poverty, widen the "digital divide," and aggravate existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective companies raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this issue is the fundamental nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise complete oversight over the vast and complex datasets utilized for calculation. This absence of distinct accountability develops the risk that AI could be controlled for personal or business gain or to direct public opinion for the benefit of a particular market. Such entities, encouraged by their own interests, possess the capacity to exercise "forms of control as subtle as they are intrusive, producing mechanisms for the manipulation of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the threat of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which perceives all the world's issues as solvable through technological means alone. [106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are typically reserved in the name of effectiveness, "as if truth, goodness, and fact immediately flow from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the typical excellent should never ever be broken for the sake of efficiency, [108] for "technological advancements that do not cause an enhancement in the quality of life of all mankind, however on the contrary, exacerbate inequalities and conflicts, can never ever count as true progress. " [109] Instead, AI ought to be put "at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more important." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship in between autonomy and duty. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's obligation throughout various elements of communal life. For Christians, the foundation of this duty lies in the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, come from God and are meant to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, instead of merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI should serve "the typical good of the entire human household," which is "the sum total of social conditions that permit individuals, either as groups or as people, to reach their fulfillment more completely and more easily." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature guy is a social being; and if he does not participate in relations with others, he can neither live nor establish his gifts." [113] This conviction highlights that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human person. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of fact, in the course of which, people "share with each other the fact they have found, or believe they have found, in such a way that they assist one another in the look for truth." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other aspects of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between individuals shaped by their unique histories, thoughts, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a diverse, diverse, and complicated truth: specific and social, reasonable and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this vibrant, noting that "together, we can seek the truth in discussion, in relaxed discussion or in enthusiastic debate. To do so calls for determination; it entails minutes of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently accept the more comprehensive experience of individuals and peoples. [...] The process of structure fraternity, be it regional or universal, can only be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to authentic encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that one can think about the challenges AI presents to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the prospective to promote connections within the human household. However, it could likewise impede a real encounter with truth and, ultimately, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic dissatisfaction with social relations, or a harmful sense of isolation." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their joy. [118] Since human intelligence is expressed and enriched also in interpersonal and embodied ways, authentic and spontaneous encounters with others are vital for engaging with truth in its fullness.

59. Because "real wisdom requires an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI introduces another obstacle. Since AI can successfully mimic the items of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is communicating with a human or a device can no longer be considered given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are usually related to people. Yet, it should be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This distinction is frequently obscured by the language used by specialists, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI also positions particular challenges for the development of children, potentially motivating them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional way, as one would relate to a chatbot. Such habits might lead young individuals to see teachers as simple dispensers of details instead of as coaches who guide and support their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in fostering the complete advancement of the human individual.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, in spite of making use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can truly experience empathy. Emotions can not be reduced to facial expressions or phrases generated in reaction to triggers; they show the method an individual, as a whole, relates to the world and to his or her own life, with the body playing a main role. True empathy needs the ability to listen, recognize another's irreducible individuality, invite their otherness, and grasp the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the realm of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, real compassion comes from the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and capturing the lived experiences of another while maintaining the difference in between self and other. [122] While AI can simulate empathetic reactions, it can not replicate the eminently individual and relational nature of authentic compassion. [123]
62. In light of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual must constantly be prevented; doing so for fraudulent purposes is a serious ethical violation that might wear down social trust. Similarly, utilizing AI to trick in other contexts-such as in education or in human relationships, including the sphere of sexuality-is likewise to be thought about immoral and needs mindful oversight to prevent damage, maintain transparency, and guarantee the dignity of all people. [124]
63. In a progressively separated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI in search of deep human relationships, simple companionship, and even psychological bonds. However, while people are meant to experience genuine relationships, AI can only mimic them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an essential part of how a person grows to become who she or he is indicated to be. If AI is used to help individuals foster authentic connections between individuals, it can contribute favorably to the complete realization of the individual. Conversely, if we change relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we risk replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to engage in a committed and intentional method with reality, specifically by recognizing with the bad and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and forging bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly incorporated into economic and monetary systems. Significant investments are currently being made not only in the technology sector but also in energy, finance, and media, particularly in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological innovation, compliance, and risk management. At the same time, AI's applications in these areas have likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of tremendous chances but also extensive risks. A very first genuine crucial point in this location worries the possibility that-due to the concentration of AI applications in the hands of a couple of corporations-only those large companies would gain from the worth produced by AI instead of the companies that utilize it.

65. Other wider elements of AI's influence on the economic-financial sphere must also be thoroughly analyzed, particularly worrying the interaction in between concrete reality and the digital world. One essential consideration in this regard includes the coexistence of diverse and alternative kinds of economic and banks within a provided context. This factor should be encouraged, as it can bring advantages in how it supports the genuine economy by fostering its advancement and stability, specifically throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it must be stressed that digital realities, not limited by any spatial bonds, tend to be more uniform and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific location and a specific history, with a typical journey identified by shared values and hopes, but also by inescapable arguments and divergences. This variety is an undeniable possession to a neighborhood's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing completely to digital technology would decrease this variety and richness. As an outcome, lots of services to economic problems that can be reached through natural dialogue between the involved parties may no longer be attainable in a world controlled by treatments and only the appearance of nearness.

66. Another area where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving fundamental changes across numerous occupations, with a range of effects. On the one hand, it has the possible to enhance competence and productivity, create brand-new tasks, enable workers to focus on more innovative tasks, and open new horizons for imagination and development.

67. However, while AI assures to improve productivity by taking control of ordinary jobs, it often requires employees to adjust to the speed and demands of devices instead of devices being created to support those who work. As an outcome, contrary to the advertised advantages of AI, present methods to the innovation can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated monitoring, and relegate them to rigid and repeated tasks. The requirement to stay up to date with the pace of innovation can wear down employees' sense of company and suppress the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to give their work. [125]
68. AI is currently removing the requirement for some tasks that were as soon as performed by human beings. If AI is utilized to change human employees instead of match them, there is a "significant threat of disproportionate advantage for the few at the cost of the impoverishment of many." [126] Additionally, as AI becomes more powerful, there is an involved threat that human labor may lose its value in the financial world. This is the rational effect of the technocratic paradigm: a world of humanity enslaved to performance, where, ultimately, the expense of mankind need to be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically important, independent of their economic output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer a financial investment in efforts to help the slow, the weak, or the less talented to find opportunities in life." [127] In light of this, "we can not allow a tool as powerful and important as Artificial Intelligence to reinforce such a paradigm, but rather, we should make Artificial Intelligence a bulwark against its growth." [128]
69. It is essential to keep in mind that "the order of things should be subordinate to the order of persons, and not the other method around." [129] Human work should not just be at the service of revenue but at "the service of the entire human person [...] considering the person's material needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and religious life." [130] In this context, the Church recognizes that work is "not only a way of making one's daily bread" however is likewise "an important dimension of social life" and "a means [...] of individual development, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work offers us a sense of shared obligation for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to development, human development and individual fulfillment," "the goal needs to not be that technological progress increasingly replaces human work, for this would be destructive to humankind" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI needs to assist, not change, human judgment. Similarly, it should never ever deteriorate imagination or lower employees to simple "cogs in a device." Therefore, "regard for the self-respect of workers and the value of work for the financial wellness of individuals, households, and societies, for task security and just wages, should be a high top priority for the international community as these types of innovation permeate more deeply into our offices." [133]
71. As individuals in God's healing work, healthcare professionals have the occupation and duty to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the healthcare profession carries an "intrinsic and undeniable ethical measurement," acknowledged by the Hippocratic Oath, which obliges doctors and health care experts to dedicate themselves to having "outright respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Do-gooder, this dedication is to be performed by guys and females "who decline the creation of a society of exclusion, and act instead as neighbors, raising up and fixing up the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI appears to hold immense capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of healthcare service providers, helping with relationships between patients and medical staff, using new treatments, and broadening access to quality care also for those who are separated or marginalized. In these ways, the innovation could boost the "thoughtful and caring nearness" [137] that healthcare companies are contacted us to extend to the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to boost however to change the relationship between clients and health care providers-leaving patients to engage with a device rather than a human being-it would reduce a most importantly crucial human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of motivating solidarity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would risk getting worse the isolation that often accompanies disease, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer viewed as a vital worth to be cared for and respected." [138] This abuse of AI would not align with regard for the self-respect of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the well-being of clients and the decisions that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare profession. This responsibility requires doctor to exercise all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options relating to those entrusted to their care, always respecting the inviolable dignity of the patients and the need for informed approval. As an outcome, decisions regarding patient treatment and the weight of obligation they entail need to constantly remain with the human individual and ought to never be entrusted to AI. [139]
75. In addition, utilizing AI to determine who must receive treatment based mainly on financial procedures or metrics of effectiveness represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that should be rejected. [140] For, "enhancing resources implies using them in an ethical and fraternal method, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to forms of bias and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can quickly multiply, producing not just oppressions in specific cases but likewise, due to the cause and effect, genuine kinds of social inequality." [142]
76. The integration of AI into healthcare also poses the danger of amplifying other existing variations in access to treatment. As health care ends up being increasingly oriented towards avoidance and lifestyle-based methods, AI-driven options might unintentionally favor more affluent populations who already enjoy much better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats reinforcing a "medication for the rich" design, where those with financial methods gain from advanced preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even standard services. To avoid such injustices, fair structures are required to guarantee that making use of AI in healthcare does not aggravate existing health care inequalities but rather serves the common good.

77. The words of the Second Vatican Council remain completely pertinent today: "True education aims to form individuals with a view towards their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a mere process of passing on truths and intellectual skills: rather, its aim is to contribute to the person's holistic formation in its numerous elements (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, etc), consisting of, for instance, community life and relations within the academic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and dignity of the human individual.

78. This technique involves a commitment to cultivating the mind, but always as a part of the integral development of the person: "We need to break that concept of education which holds that educating means filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we inform robots, cerebral minds, not people. Educating is taking a threat in the stress in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human individual is the important relationship in between teacher and trainee. Teachers do more than convey understanding; they model essential human qualities and motivate the pleasure of discovery. [146] Their presence motivates trainees both through the material they teach and the care they show for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, shared understanding, and the capability to resolve everyone's special self-respect and potential. On the part of the trainee, this can produce an authentic desire to grow. The physical existence of a teacher develops a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and nurtures the trainee's essential development.

80. In this context, AI provides both opportunities and challenges. If used in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and ordered to the genuine objectives of education, AI can end up being an important instructional resource by improving access to education, using tailored assistance, and offering instant feedback to trainees. These benefits might enhance the learning experience, specifically in cases where customized attention is needed, or instructional resources are otherwise limited.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intellect to reason well in all matters, to reach out towards truth, and to grasp it," [147] while assisting the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more crucial in an age marked by innovation, in which "it is no longer simply a concern of 'using' instruments of communication, however of living in a highly digitalized culture that has had an extensive effect on [...] our capability to interact, discover, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of cultivating "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and profession that it carries out," [150] the comprehensive use of AI in education could result in the trainees' increased reliance on technology, deteriorating their capability to perform some skills individually and aggravating their dependence on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to help individuals develop their vital thinking abilities and problem-solving skills, many others simply supply answers rather of triggering trainees to reach answers themselves or compose text for themselves. [152] Instead of training youths how to generate details and generate fast actions, education must encourage "the accountable usage of liberty to deal with problems with good sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in the use of types of artificial intelligence ought to aim above all at promoting important thinking. Users of any ages, however specifically the young, need to develop a discerning method to the usage of information and content collected on the web or produced by expert system systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to assist trainees and specialists to grasp the social and ethical elements of the advancement and uses of innovation." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II recalled, "worldwide today, defined by such fast advancements in science and technology, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever higher value and seriousness." [155] In a specific method, Catholic universities are advised to be present as great laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are prompted to engage "with wisdom and imagination" [156] in cautious research on this phenomenon, assisting to extract the salutary capacity within the various fields of science and reality, and guiding them constantly towards fairly sound applications that plainly serve the cohesion of our societies and the common excellent, reaching brand-new frontiers in the dialogue in between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it ought to be noted that current AI programs have been understood to supply prejudiced or made details, which can lead trainees to trust inaccurate material. This issue "not only runs the risk of legitimizing fake news and reinforcing a dominant culture's advantage, but, in other words, it likewise undermines the educational procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions may emerge between appropriate and improper uses of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive standard is that the usage of AI ought to constantly be transparent and never ever misrepresented.

85. AI might be used as an aid to human dignity if it helps people comprehend complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their look for the reality. [158]
86. However, AI also provides a serious risk of generating controlled material and incorrect details, which can easily misguide individuals due to its resemblance to the truth. Such misinformation might happen inadvertently, as in the case of AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear real however are not. Since producing material that imitates human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these dangers shows challenging. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and false details can be rather serious. For this factor, all those associated with producing and using AI systems need to be committed to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and shared to the public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to create false details, a much more uncomfortable issue depends on the purposeful misuse of AI for manipulation. This can occur when people or companies intentionally generate and spread out false content with the aim to deceive or cause harm, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false representation of a person, modified or generated by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is especially apparent when they are used to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves might be synthetic, the damage they trigger is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine wounds in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by distorting "our relationship with others and with truth," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly weaken the foundations of society. This issue needs mindful guideline, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or affected media-can spread accidentally, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society becomes indifferent to the reality, numerous groups build their own versions of "realities," weakening the "reciprocal ties and mutual dependencies" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated incorrect material wears down rely on what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such prevalent deceptiveness is no minor matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, dismantling the fundamental trust on which societies are built. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven frauds is not just the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If technology is to serve human dignity and not harm it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human community must be proactive in addressing these trends with regard to human self-respect and the promotion of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated content must always work out diligence in validating the reality of what they distribute and, in all cases, need to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of humans, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that make use of the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the ongoing vigilance and mindful discernment of all users regarding their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the information everyone creates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data communicates not only details however also personal and relational knowledge, which, in an increasingly digitized context, can amount to power over the individual. Moreover, while some kinds of information may pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others may touch upon the individual's interiority, perhaps even their conscience. Seen in this method, privacy plays a necessary function in safeguarding the limits of a person's inner life, maintaining their flexibility to relate to others, reveal themselves, and make choices without unnecessary control. This defense is also tied to the defense of spiritual flexibility, as monitoring can also be misused to apply control over the lives of followers and how they express their faith.

91. It is appropriate, therefore, to deal with the concern of privacy from a concern for the genuine flexibility and inalienable dignity of the human individual "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council included the right "to protect personal privacy" among the basic rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that needs to be encompassed all individuals on account of their "sublime dignity." [167] Furthermore, the Church has also verified the right to the genuine respect for a personal life in the context of verifying the individual's right to a good credibility, defense of their physical and mental integrity, and flexibility from damage or undue intrusion [168] -essential parts of the due regard for the intrinsic dignity of the human person. [169]
92. Advances in AI-powered information processing and analysis now make it possible to presume patterns in an individual's habits and thinking from even a little amount of details, making the function of information privacy much more important as a protect for the self-respect and relational nature of the human individual. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant mindsets towards others are on the rise, ranges are otherwise diminishing or disappearing to the point that the right to privacy rarely exists. Everything has ended up being a kind of phenomenon to be examined and checked, and people's lives are now under constant surveillance." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and proper methods to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common excellent, utilizing it for monitoring aimed at making use of, restricting others' liberty, or benefitting a couple of at the cost of the numerous is unjustifiable. The danger of monitoring overreach should be kept an eye on by appropriate regulators to make sure openness and public accountability. Those responsible for security should never ever surpass their authority, which must always prefer the self-respect and flexibility of every person as the essential basis of a just and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "essential regard for human dignity demands that we refuse to allow the individuality of the individual to be determined with a set of data." [171] This particularly applies when AI is used to evaluate people or groups based upon their habits, attributes, or history-a practice referred to as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we ought to beware about delegating judgments to algorithms that process information, often collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and prior habits. Such data can be infected by societal prejudices and prejudgments. An individual's past behavior need to not be used to deny him or her the chance to change, grow, and add to society. We can not permit algorithms to restrict or condition respect for human self-respect, or to omit empathy, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that people are able to alter." [172]
95. AI has many appealing applications for improving our relationship with our "common home," such as producing designs to forecast extreme climate occasions, proposing engineering services to minimize their impact, managing relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, enhance energy use, and offer early warning systems for public health emergency situations. These developments have the prospective to reinforce resilience against climate-related difficulties and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the exact same time, present AI designs and the hardware required to support them consume large amounts of energy and water, considerably contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This reality is typically obscured by the method this technology exists in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can provide the impression that information is kept and processed in an intangible world, separated from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not a heavenly domain separate from the real world; similar to all calculating innovations, it depends on physical machines, cable televisions, and energy. The same is real of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, particularly big language models (LLMs), they need ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage infrastructure. Considering the heavy toll these innovations handle the environment, it is important to establish sustainable options that decrease their effect on our typical home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is vital "that we try to find services not just in innovation but in a change of humanity." [175] A complete and authentic understanding of creation recognizes that the value of all developed things can not be minimized to their simple utility. Therefore, a totally human approach to the stewardship of the earth rejects the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which looks for to "extract everything possible" from the world, [176] and rejects the "misconception of development," which assumes that "ecological problems will fix themselves merely with the application of new innovation and without any need for ethical factors to consider or deep modification." [177] Such a state of mind must give method to a more holistic method that appreciates the order of creation and promotes the important good of the human person while securing our common home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the constant teaching of the Popes ever since have actually insisted that peace is not merely the lack of war and is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers in between foes. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the harmony of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of individuals, free interaction, respect for the dignity of persons and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the result of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it should be mainly developed through patient diplomacy, the active promotion of justice, uniformity, important human advancement, and regard for the dignity of all individuals. [180] In this way, the tools used to maintain peace needs to never ever be enabled to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they must constantly be governed by a "firm determination to regard other individuals and nations, together with their self-respect, as well as the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities could assist countries seek peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can also be highly problematic. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has actually caused a reduced understanding of the devastation brought on by those weapon systems and the burden of duty for their usage, resulting in a much more cold and removed method to the tremendous tragedy of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the principle of war as a last option in legitimate self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with disastrous repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for severe ethical concern" since they do not have the "distinct human capability for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this reason, Pope Francis has actually urgently called for a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a prohibition on their use, starting with "an effective and concrete dedication to introduce ever higher and correct human control. No machine needs to ever pick to take the life of a human being." [186]
101. Since it is a little step from machines that can kill autonomously with accuracy to those efficient in large-scale destruction, some AI researchers have revealed concerns that such technology postures an "existential danger" by having the prospective to act in ways that could threaten the survival of whole areas or even of humankind itself. This risk needs severe attention, reflecting the long-standing issue about innovations that approve war "an unmanageable devastating power over varieties of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing children. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "carry out an examination of war with a totally new attitude" [188] is more immediate than ever.

102. At the same time, while the theoretical risks of AI are worthy of attention, the more immediate and pushing concern lies in how individuals with malicious intents might misuse this innovation. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unforeseeable, humankind's previous actions provide clear warnings. The atrocities dedicated throughout history are adequate to raise deep concerns about the possible abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humanity now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or decrease it to a stack of debris." [190] Given this fact, the Church advises us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to use our intelligence towards things developing favorably," or toward "decadence and mutual damage." [191] To avoid humanity from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there need to be a clear stand against all applications of technology that naturally threaten human life and dignity. This commitment needs careful discernment about making use of AI, particularly in military defense applications, to guarantee that it always respects human dignity and serves the typical good. The advancement and implementation of AI in armaments should be subject to the greatest levels of ethical analysis, governed by an issue for human self-respect and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology uses amazing tools to supervise and establish the world's resources. However, sometimes, humanity is increasingly delivering control of these resources to makers. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of synthetic basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical type of AI that would match or go beyond human intelligence and produce unthinkable advancements. Some even speculate that AGI might attain superhuman capabilities. At the same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are tempted to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can just be truly satisfied in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of substituting God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture clearly cautions against (e.g., Ex. 20:4; 32:1 -5; 34:17). Moreover, AI may show even more sexy than conventional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths but do not speak; eyes, however do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or at least gives the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is crucial to keep in mind that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity-it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor. AI can not possess much of the capabilities particular to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived "Other" greater than itself, with which to share existence and responsibilities, humanity threats producing an alternative to God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, however humankind itself-which, in this method, becomes enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve mankind and contribute to the common good, it remains a development of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It should never be ascribed excessive worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a man made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is better than the things he worships considering that he has life, but they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, people, "by their interior life, transcend the entire material universe; they experience this deep interiority when they get in into their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they decide their own destiny in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis advises us, that each specific finds the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's individual uniqueness and the willingness to provide oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "efficient in setting our other powers and enthusiasms, and our whole person, in a position of reverence and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "offers to treat every one of us as a 'Thou,' constantly and permanently." [199]
108. Considering the numerous challenges positioned by advances in innovation, Pope Francis stressed the need for growth in "human responsibility, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the growth in the potential that this technology brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes a broadening of obligation on the part of people and neighborhoods." [201]
109. At the very same time, the "necessary and essential question" remains "whether in the context of this development male, as guy, is becoming truly much better, that is to state, more mature spiritually, more conscious of the dignity of his humankind, more accountable, more available to others, particularly the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is essential to understand how to assess specific applications of AI in specific contexts to figure out whether its usage promotes human dignity, the vocation of the human individual, and the typical good. As with many innovations, the results of the various uses of AI might not always be predictable from their beginning. As these applications and their social effects become clearer, suitable reactions must be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, organizations, federal governments, and worldwide organizations must operate at their proper levels to make sure that AI is utilized for the good of all.

111. A substantial difficulty and chance for the typical great today lies in thinking about AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared responsibility for fostering the integral well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people typically blame devices for personal and social problems; nevertheless, "this just embarrasses guy and does not correspond to his dignity," for "it is not worthy to move duty from male to a device." [203] Only the human person can be morally accountable, and the obstacles of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, facing those difficulties "needs an increase of spirituality." [204]
112. An additional indicate consider is the call, triggered by the look of AI on the world stage, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos warned that "the threat is not in the multiplication of machines, but in the ever-increasing variety of guys accustomed from their youth to desire only what devices can give." [205] This difficulty is as real today as it was then, as the rapid speed of digitization risks a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and after that forgotten and even considered unimportant because they can not be computed in official terms. AI ought to be used only as a tool to match human intelligence instead of replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those aspects of human life that go beyond computation is essential for maintaining "a genuine humanity" that "seems to stay in the middle of our technological culture, almost unnoticed, like a mist leaking carefully underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The vast expanse of the world's knowledge is now available in manner ins which would have filled past generations with awe. However, to guarantee that improvements in knowledge do not end up being humanly or spiritually barren, one must surpass the simple build-up of information and aim to attain true wisdom. [208]
114. This knowledge is the gift that mankind needs most to resolve the profound concerns and ethical difficulties posed by AI: "Only by adopting a spiritual method of viewing truth, just by recovering a knowledge of the heart, can we challenge and interpret the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to incorporate the entire and its parts, our choices and their effects." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who like it; it anticipates those who desire it, and it goes in search of those who deserve it (cf. Wis 6:12 -16)." [210]
115. In a world marked by AI, we require the grace of the Holy Spirit, who "allows us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, situations, occasions and to uncover their real significance." [211]
116. Since a "individual's perfection is determined not by the details or understanding they possess, however by the depth of their charity," [212] how we integrate AI "to include the least of our siblings and sisters, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the real measure of our mankind." [213] The "wisdom of the heart" can light up and assist the human-centered use of this innovation to assist promote the common good, take care of our "common home," advance the look for the fact, foster essential human development, favor human solidarity and fraternity, and lead humanity to its ultimate goal: joy and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of knowledge, believers will have the ability to serve as ethical representatives efficient in utilizing this technology to promote an authentic vision of the human person and society. [215] This should be made with the understanding that technological development belongs to God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are called to order towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the continuous search for the True and the Good.

The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience granted on 14 January 2025 to the undersigned Prefects and Secretaries of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, authorized this Note and bought its publication.

Given up Rome, at the workplaces of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, on 28 January 2025, the Liturgical Memorial of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church.

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Integral Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

IV. The Role of Ethics in Guiding the Development and Use of AI

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See likewise Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposition for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this document explaining the outputs or processes of AI are utilized figuratively to explain its operations and are not intended to anthropomorphize the device. [8] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3; Id., Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [9] Here, one can see the main positions of the "transhumanists" and the "posthumanists." Transhumanists argue that technological advancements will enable people to conquer their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will eventually modify human identity to the level that humankind itself may no longer be thought about truly "human." Both views rest on a fundamentally unfavorable understanding of human corporality, which treats the body more as an obstacle than as an essential part of the individual's identity and call to complete realization. Yet, this unfavorable view of the body is inconsistent with a correct understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic clinical progress, it affirms that human self-respect is rooted in "the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "dignity is also inherent in everyone's body, which takes part in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This technique shows a functionalist point of view, which decreases the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be completely measured in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear truly smart, it would still remain practical in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is associated to devices, it needs to be clarified that this refers to calculative thinking rather than critical thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate using abstract thought, it must be specified that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is an innovative procedure that eludes programs and transcends constraints. [13] On the fundamental function of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York City 2010, 141-182). [14] For further discussion of these anthropological and theological foundations, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 43-144. [15] Aristotle, Metaphysics, I. 1, 980 a 21. [16] Cf. Augustine, De Genesi advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he transcends to the irrational animals. Now, this [faculty] is factor itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it may more suitably be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When considering all that they have, humans discover that they are most distinguished from animals precisely by the truth they have intelligence." This is also restated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who states that "man is the most perfect of all earthly beings endowed with movement, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which guy abstracts from things and "gets in his mind things in fact intelligible" (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 76). [17] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [18] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 49, a. 5, ad 3. Cf. ibid., I, q. 79; II-II, q. 47, a. 3; II-II, q. 49, a. 2. For a contemporary perspective that echoes components of the classical and medieval distinction between these two modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York City 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize because reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal ethical demands." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "usually considers the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unimaginable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), trademarketclassifieds.com 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however instead totally disclosed its significance and worth." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is unified to the body in order that it might have an existence and an operation ideal to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise have reason and with it they circle in discourse around the reality of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of focusing the lots of into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, deserve conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York City - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind can going beyond instant issues and understanding certain truths that are constant, as real now as in the past. As it peers into humanity, factor finds universal worths obtained from that same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of factor is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York City 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability enables us to comprehend messages in any type of interaction in a manner that both takes into consideration and transcends their product or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a wisdom that "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to uncover their genuine meaning" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our imagination enables us to produce new material or ideas, mainly by offering an original viewpoint on truth. Both capabilities depend upon the existence of a personal subjectivity for their complete realization. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a dedication to the fact, is far more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to truth promotes its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field devoid of relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to reality hence protects it from 'a fideism that deprives it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 293. Cf. ibid., par. 294. [47] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 295, 299, 302. Bonaventure compares the universe to "a book showing, representing, and explaining its Maker," the Triune God who gives existence to all things (Breviloquium 2.12.1). Cf. Alain de Lille, De Incarnatione Christi, PL 210, 579a: "Omnis mundi creatura quasi liber et pictura nobis est et speculum." [48] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 67: AAS 107 (2015 ), 874; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589-592; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 57: "humans occupy a distinct place in the universe according to the divine plan: they delight in the benefit of sharing in the magnificent governance of visible creation. [...] Since guy's place as ruler remains in fact an involvement in the magnificent governance of development, we mention it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This idea is likewise reflected in the development account, where God brings creatures to Adam "to see what he would call them. And whatever [he] called every living animal, that was its name" (Gen. 2:19), an action that shows the active engagement of human intelligence in the stewardship of God's production. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 236: AAS 105 (2023 ), 1115; Id., Address to Participants in the Meeting of University Chaplains and Pastoral Workers Promoted by the Dicastery for Culture and Education (24 November 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 November 2023, 7. [55] Cf. J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 5.1, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 99-100; Francis, Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [56] Francis, Address to the Members of the National Confederation of Artisans and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CNA) (15 November 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 15 November 2024, 8. [57] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia (2 February 2020), par. 41: AAS 112 (2020 ), 246; Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 146: AAS 107 (2015 ), 906. [58] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 864. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), pars. 17-24: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47-50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985-987. [59] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 20: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [60] P. Claudel, Conversation sur Jean Racine, Gallimard, Paris 1956, 32: "L'intelligence n'est rien sans la délectation." Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 13: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5: "The mind and the will are put at the service of the higher good by picking up and enjoying realities." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he highest norm of human life is the magnificent law itself-eternal, unbiased and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the entire world and the ways of the human neighborhood according to a plan conceived in his wisdom and love. God has made it possible for man to participate in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of magnificent providence, lots of might have the ability to reach a much deeper and much deeper understanding of unchangeable fact." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has actually inscribed his own image and similarity on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), giving upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not correspond to any work he carries out, but which circulation from his essential dignity as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this innovation, recalling that the expression is likewise utilized to designate the field of research study and not only its applications. [71] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 34-35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 51: AAS 83 (1991 ), 856-857. [72] For instance, see the support of scientific expedition in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These writers, among a long list of other Catholics participated in scientific research and technological exploration, show that "faith and science can be unified in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the guys and female of our time and not misused to harm and even destroy them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes man a moral subject. When he acts deliberately, guy is, so to speak, the daddy of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father encouraged efforts "to guarantee that technology remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the good." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the role of human company in selecting a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is created, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um pass away Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a purpose and, in its influence on human society, constantly represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, therefore making it possible for certain people to perform particular actions while avoiding others from carrying out different ones. In a basically explicit way, this constitutive power-dimension of technology always consists of the worldview of those who developed and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of devices, which seem to know how to pick independently, we need to be extremely clear that decision-making [...] need to constantly be delegated the human person. We would condemn humankind to a future without hope if we eliminated individuals's capability to make decisions about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend upon the options of machines." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "bias" in this file refers to algorithmic predisposition (methodical and consistent errors in computer system systems that may disproportionately prejudice certain groups in unintended methods) or finding out bias (which will lead to training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "bias vector" in neural networks (which is a specification utilized to change the output of "nerve cells" to adjust more properly to the data). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the development in consensus "on the need for development procedures to appreciate such values as addition, openness, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and also welcomed "the efforts of global companies to manage these innovations so that they promote authentic progress, contributing, that is, to a much better world and an integrally greater quality of life." [95] Francis, Greetings to a Delegation of the "Max Planck Society" (23 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 February 2023, 8. [96] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For additional discussion of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance of discussion in a pluralist society oriented towards a "robust and strong social ethics," see Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 211-214: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [100] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [101] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [102] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [103] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. [104] Cf. Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Internet (22 February 2002), par. 10. [105] Francis, Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414; pricing quote the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Lots of people] want their interpersonal relationships provided by sophisticated equipment, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells us continuously to run the threat of a face-to-face encounter with others, with their physical existence which challenges us, with their pain and their pleas, with their happiness which infects us in our close and continuous interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from subscription in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' teaching about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced estimate in Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1912. Cf. John XXIII, Encyclical Letter Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961), par. 219: AAS 53 (1961 ), 453. [130] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 64: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1086. [131] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 162: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1025. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 6: AAS 73 (1981 ), 591: "work is 'for guy' and not male 'for work.' Through this conclusion one rightly pertains to acknowledge the pre-eminence of the subjective significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced estimate in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), funsilo.date pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful effects, it is that of healthcare. When a sick individual is not placed in the center or their dignity is ruled out, this triggers attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the bad luck of others. And this is extremely serious! [...] The application of a business approach to the health care sector, if indiscriminate [...] may run the risk of discarding human beings." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on using Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing quote Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the contemporary person] does listen to instructors, it is because they are witnesses." [147] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 6.1, London 18733, 125-126. [148] Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 316. [149] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 86: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413, estimating the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy document about using generative AI in education and research, UNESCO notes: "Among the essential concerns [of making use of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether human beings can possibly cede standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather concentrate on higher-order thinking abilities based upon the outputs supplied by AI. Writing, for instance, is often associated with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now begin with a well-structured outline offered by GenAI. Some specialists have defined making use of GenAI to produce text in this way as 'writing without thinking'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American theorist Hannah Arendt foresaw such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and warned: "If it should end up being true that knowledge (in the sense of know-how) and believed have parted company for good, then we would certainly become the defenseless slaves, not so much of our makers as of our knowledge" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may assist individuals gain access to the "range of resources for generating higher understanding of truth" contained in the works of approach (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be really indifferent to the concern of whether what they understand is real or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually fulfilled lots of who wanted to deceive, however none who desired to be deceived'"; pricing quote Augustine, Confessiones, X, 23, 33: PL 32, 794. [163] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), par. 62. [164] Benedict XVI, Message for the XLIII World Day of Social Communications (24 May 2009): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2009, 8. [165] Cf. Dicastery for Communications, Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no male might with impunity breach that human self-respect which God himself treats with fantastic reverence"; as estimated in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in the online world obliges States to also appreciate the right to personal privacy, by protecting residents from invasive monitoring and allowing them to protect their individual details from unapproved gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body recognized a list of "early pledges of AI helping to attend to environment change" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change information into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might assist develop new techniques and financial investments to minimize emissions, influence new economic sector financial investments in net no, protect biodiversity, and build broad-based social strength" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to shop, procedure, and handle their data remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We need to ensure and protect an area for proper human control over the choices made by artificial intelligence programs: human self-respect itself depends on it." [186] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to Working Group II on Emerging Technologies at the UN Disarmament Commission (3 April 2024): "The advancement and usage of deadly self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that do not have the appropriate human control would pose essential ethical concerns, offered that LAWS can never ever be morally accountable topics capable of abiding by worldwide humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we disregard the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the incorrect hands, helping with, for circumstances, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of genuine systems of government. In a word, the world does not require brand-new technologies that contribute to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a much better understanding today that the simple build-up of goods and services [...] is insufficient for the realization of human joy. Nor, in effect, does the availability of the lots of genuine benefits supplied in recent times by science and innovation, consisting of the computer system sciences, bring liberty from every kind of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the considerable body of resources and potential at guy's disposal is directed by a moral understanding and by an orientation towards the real good of the human race, it quickly turns against man to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Consulting With the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce greater wisdom. Wisdom is not born of fast searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified information. That is not the method to mature in the encounter with truth." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.